[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608220730030.14814@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 07:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [take9 2/2] kevent: poll/select() notifications. Timer notifications.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 10:21:36AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
>>
>> poll/select() notifications. Timer notifications.
>>
>> This patch includes generic poll/select and timer notifications.
>>
>> kevent_poll works simialr to epoll and has the same issues (callback
>> is invoked not from internal state machine of the caller, but through
>> process awake).
>
> I'm not a big fan of duplicating code over and over. kevent is a candidate
> for a generic event devlivery mechanisms which is a _very_ good thing. But
> starting that system by duplicating existing functionality is not very nice.
>
> What speaks against a patch the recplaces the epoll core by something that
> build on kevent while still supporting the epoll interface as a compatibility
> shim?
Sorry, I'm catching up with a huge post-vacation backlog, so I didn't have
the time to look at the source code. But, if kevent performance is same or
better, and the external epoll interface is fully supported, than I think
the shim layer idea is a good one. Provided the shim being smaller than
eventpoll.c :)
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists